Mr. Comey’s associates also denied the claim made by Mr. Trump, in his letter firing Mr. Comey, that the director told him on three occasions that he wasn’t under investigation. They said Mr. Comey never gave Mr. Trump any such guidance, which would violate longstanding policies on criminal investigations. “That is literally farcical,” said one associate.

Comey’s statement proves these “associates” wrong.

The first time he assured Trump

In that context, prior to the January 6 meeting, I discussed with the FBI’s leadership team whether I should be prepared to assure President-Elect Trump that we were not investigating him personally. That was true; we did not have an open counter-intelligence case on him. We agreed I should do so if circumstances warranted. During our one-on-one meeting at Trump Tower, based on President- Elect Trump’s reaction to the briefing and without him directly asking the question, I offered that assurance.

The second time he assured Trump

During the dinner, the President returned to the salacious material I had briefed him about on January 6, and, as he had done previously, expressed his disgust for the allegations and strongly denied them. He said he was considering ordering me to investigate the alleged incident to prove it didn’t happen. I replied that he should give that careful thought because it might create a narrative that we were investigating him personally, which we weren’t, and because it was very difficult to prove a negative. He said he would think about it and asked me to think about it.

The third time he assured Trump

Then the President asked why there had been a congressional hearing about Russia the previous week – at which I had, as the Department of Justice directed, confirmed the investigation into possible coordination between Russia and the Trump campaign. I explained the demands from the leadership of both parties in Congress for more information, and that Senator Grassley had even held up the confirmation of the Deputy Attorney General until we briefed him in detail on the investigation. I explained that we had briefed the leadership of Congress on exactly which individuals we were investigating and that we had told those Congressional leaders that we were not personally investigating President Trump. I reminded him I had previously told him that.

2. The claim that Trump Obstructed Justice

Obstruction of Justice is the main narrative that Democrats have pushed since Donald Trump fired James Comey. Now, this “obstruction of justice” idea is flawed for a few reasons. The first reason it is flawed is that Comey never alerted anyone. Had Donald Trump obstructed justice then James Comey would have been legally bound to tell someone about it. Comey didn’t do this. The reasoning that Comey didn’t do this was because he didn’t believe Trump tried to obstruct justice.

When the door by the grandfather clock closed, and we were alone, the President began by saying, “I want to talk about Mike Flynn.” Flynn had resigned the previous day. The President began by saying Flynn hadn’t done anything wrong in speaking with the Russians, but he had to let him go because he had misled the Vice President. He added that he had other concerns about Flynn, which he did not then specify.

The President then returned to the topic of Mike Flynn, saying, “He is a good guy and has been through a lot.” He repeated that Flynn hadn’t done anything wrong on his calls with the Russians, but had misled the Vice President. He then said, “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.” I replied only that “he is a good guy.” (In fact, I had a positive experience dealing with Mike Flynn when he was a colleague as Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency at the beginning of my term at FBI.) I did not say I would “let this go.”

I immediately prepared an unclassified memo of the conversation about Flynn and discussed the matter with FBI senior leadership. I had understood the President to be requesting that we drop any investigation of Flynn in connection with false statements about his conversations with the Russian ambassador in December. I did not understand the President to be talking about the broader investigation into Russia or possible links to his campaign. I could be wrong, but I took him to be focusing on what had just happened with Flynn’s departure and the controversy around his account of his phone calls. Regardless, it was very concerning, given the FBI’s role as an independent investigative agency.

Judge Napolitano agreed that Trump did nothing illegal in an interview with Trish Reagan.

“It doesn’t appear as though these conversations that the president had with Director Comey could constitute the level of constitutional obstruction of justice necessary to commence any further proceedings like impeachment like Democrats want to do.”

You can make the case that Trump was ignorant to discuss this with Comey but ignorance doesn’t relate to obstruction of justice.

3, The Claim that Flynn resigned over his Russian ties

The MSM pushed a narrative that Former National Security Advisor General Flynn resigned over illegal contacts with Russian officials. Comey’s opening statement shatters this narrative.

When the door by the grandfather clock closed, and we were alone, the President began by saying, “I want to talk about Mike Flynn.” Flynn had resigned the previous day. The President began by saying Flynn hadn’t done anything wrong in speaking with the Russians, but he had to let him go because he had misled the Vice President. He added that he had other concerns about Flynn, which he did not then specify.

So, we can finally put to bed the rumor that Trump forced Flynn’s hand in resigning due to his meeting with the Russian ambassador.

4. That Trump colluded with Russia:

Now, the mainstream media will set their hair on fire and try and further push false narratives. They will look at his loyalty request and say “look he was trying to control the investigation”. That narrative couldn’t be further from the truth. Common sense while reading this should point to the fact that Trump is innocent. At no point did he try to kill the investigation. At no point did he try and interfere with the investigation. All he asked was for Comey to be honest with the American people. Comey’s interactions with President Trump showcase an innocent man. A man that can’t believe this nonsense is even being discussed. He points out how this investigation is affecting his agenda and stopping him from being able to run the country at full strength.

All of this squares with the theory I have been proposing for weeks: namely, that Trump knows he is innocent of collusion with Russia, was angry and puzzled that Comey wouldn’t say so, and fired him out of pique. That isn’t illegal, and it isn’t obstruction, and it isn’t even pressure. But that’s not how the press will play it.